Opinion
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 1:04-CR-0478-RWS.
July 8, 2011
ORDER
This case is before the Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation [259] of Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyard, Defendant's Motion for Correction [260], and Defendant's Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis. After reviewing the record, including Movant's Objections to the Report and Recommendation [262], the Court enters the following Order.
The Report and Recommendation [259] is received with approval and adopted as the Opinion and Order of this Court. In his Objections, Defendant asserts that, based upon his allegations of fraud, this Court should not treat his present motion as a second or successive § 2255 motion. These allegations were raised in Defendant's direct appeal and in his first § 2255 motion. Defendant is not entitled to relief on these claims. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion for Judicial Investigation of Fraud Upon the Court [242] and Motions for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis [250 and 254] are DENIED.
In his Motion for Correction [260], Defendant requests that the Court take notice that his Notice of Appeal [248] of the Court's Order [243] denying his Motion to Alter or Amend [239] was filed on May 16, 2011 and that he had not previously filed a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis on that claim. Defendant's Motion is hereby GRANTED such that the Court takes notice that Defendant had not filed a motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis the Court's May 2, 2011 Order [243] until he filed such Motion [261] on June 21, 2011. As to the latest Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis, said Motion is DENIED for the same reasons the Motions for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis were denied in the Report and Recommendation.